• From: John Madden <john.madden@d...>
• To: xml-Dev Listserv <xml-dev@l...>
• Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2010 09:21:53 -0500

On Dec 17, 2010, at 9:13 AM, Stephen Green wrote:

> Ignoring complexTypes and not attempting to be valid XSD, how about
> just the following?
> 
> <element name="schema">
> <element name="element">
> <attribute name="name" type="string"/>
> <attribute name="type" type="string">
> <!-- enumerations = string integer decimal date -->
> </attribute>
> </element>
> <element name="attribute">
> <attribute name="name" type="string"/>
> <attribute name="type" type="string">
> <!-- enumerations = string integer decimal date -->
> </attribute>
> </element>
> </element>
> 
> I think it is valid MicoXML, isn't it, and in the spirit of MicroXML
> - easy to parse
> - easy even to execute in MicroXML parsers if need be
> 
> Or adding a little more and it could be valid XSD too (but that
> might be going too far in the direction of XSD).
> 

Looks a lot like Relax NG without namespaces.

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Micro XSD for Micro XML?
    • From: James Bryce Clark <jamie.clark@o...>
  • Re: Micro XSD for Micro XML?
    • From: Olivier Rossel <olivier.rossel@g...>

• References:
  • Micro XSD for Micro XML?
    • From: Stephen Green <stephengreenubl@g...>
  • Re: Micro XSD for Micro XML?
    • From: Michael Kay <mike@s...>
  • Re: Micro XSD for Micro XML?
    • From: Olivier Rossel <olivier.rossel@g...>
  • Re: Micro XSD for Micro XML?
    • From: Stephen Green <stephengreenubl@g...>
  • Re: Micro XSD for Micro XML?
    • From: Dave Pawson <davep@d...>
  • Re: Micro XSD for Micro XML?
    • From: Stephen Green <stephengreenubl@g...>